Wednesday, July 02, 2014

Oh, well...

Since you asked me so pointedly and politely, I will comply with your wishes and no longer bring any firearms to Target. Unfortunately, my firearm is in the same pants as my wallet, which kinda sucks, because you were convenient.

A retailer on the brink can't afford to be pissing off customers wholesale.

The local Target is right around the corner from my house. It would not be an exaggeration to say that Roseholme Cottage does a several thousand dollars of business a year there. F'rinstance, just looking around where I sit, my iPad, pocket digicam, laptop bag, USB stick in the computer... all from Target. To say nothing of socks, shirts, groceries or regular household supplies or all the other odds and sods from there.

There are other companies who will gladly sell these items to me. Piss off enough customers, and even a big retailer will feel the sting. Especially one that lost consumer confidence recently and has been consolidating stores...

If they had wanted to ask people to not bring openly carried firearms into the store, they could have.

I understand that some people will not want to give up the convenience of Target, and therefore will convince themselves that Target really does love their guns, and the black eye came from walking into a door. :(

Back around 20 years ago, a friend told me that he had stopped in Target to pick up some stuff including ammo for his 270. He asked a Target employee where they kept their ammo and she told him that not only did they not sell guns or ammo, they donate a portion of every sale to gun control groups. I have not been to a Target since.

I will comply with Targets wishes. Have one 3 miles from the house, but don't shop there. I don't like the prices, quality and their employees generally are incompetent and treat me like I'm not good enough to shop there. So, I don't.

If I went to Target, I'd stop going. I hadn't been for a year and went to pick up something as it was convenient and I was in the area, next thing I know, I'm getting a new debit card issued and offers for free identity protection.

Screw them, I hear from the internet they're nothing but a bunch of gay, muslim, French commies anyway.

They don't like Walmarts in my liberal inner suburb, and they certainly don't like Carry of any kind, so Target is the only store available to me, of that type, and I have to comply wih the request anyway, but... I can find BigBox type stuff elsewhere, too.

They're convenient to me - not quite within walking distance, but on the way to everything else. I gave up on them months ago when they told everyone "we don't care what happens to your personal information" with their credit card fiasco.

I guess they don't care about their customers twice as much, either.

If they ever had a chance to get me back in their stores denying me my right of self defense clinches it.

They clearly mean to prohibit all and any firearms in the store, “even where communities where it is permitted by law.”I don't see any language there about open carry or unlicensed carry. There is not any specification or exemption.Why, if I did ever enter a target (store not the wrong end of a firing line) I will be on the lookout for cops because "firearms" are not welcome.Of course we know they do not mean that, the police are the "only ones" that are professional enough to manage that kind of power.

Target has been heavily lobbied by the Bloomberg Mom's Demand group, which is very active and well financed here in Minnesota. They are also owned by the family of our current incompetent Governor. I prefer to drive a little farther to Fleet Farm, which is less fashion oriented, but is much more my kind of store.

>>>They clearly mean to prohibit all and any firearms in the store, “even where communities where it is permitted by law.”I don't see any language there about open carry or unlicensed carry. There is not any specification or exemption.<<<

I think it is still unclear what they meant, and until they put up signs that have the force of law, it is all meaningless. I don't shop at Target often, and if I ever see a sign --with the force of law-- I simply will turn around and walk away. If I see a sign, but know that it does not have the force of law, I will ignore it.

Target has drawn my ire before. They are the "liberal Walmart." That they do not allow Salvation Army bell-ringers to solicit during the Christmas season is reason enough to take business elsewhere.

Well, I used to go to the Target about 4 miles from my home. But they've REALLY gone Downhill in the last couple of years. Just try to find Men's Shoes, for example. But there's a Wal-Mart about 3 miles from my Home and they SELL Ammo.

I don't blame the OC movement per se for this one, but carry rights are starting to come to a head in this country, and folks are choosing sides. Target could have taken Cabela's route: "Keep it holstered or cased, retard".

Gun owners aren't sitting in the back of the bus, and the bigots are starting to howl.

Hopefully we can keep idiots like Embrey from scarin' the white folks while the serious work gets done.

Is there a list somewhere of which places we can and can't go without getting our 2A feelings hurt? Quite frankly, my scorecard is out of date.

I used to just ignore this crap unless I saw a "No Guns" sticker on the window out front. Those stickers don't have the force of law here in Florida, but I might as well go someplace that WANTS my money instead.

Apparently now "requesting" that we don't carry there is now a thing. If we're going to stop going places because we have been "requested" not to carry, we're going to need a better tracking system. Meaningless (here in Florida) "No Guns" stickers were easy. Trying to keep all these requests straight is a pain in the ass.

No more Target, no more Chipotle, no more Starbucks (no biggie, I don't like burnt coffee anyway).

Where else? Costco, because they have a no-guns policy in the fine print of their membership contract?

They lost my family's business, as I told them on their blog. They had no consideration for my private information and now have no consideration for my private person. The ~$500/year they got from my group will go elsewhere.

Don't read this as sarcastic, please: I don't know or care where other people spend their money. I only know where I do. I'm not the purity police. What offends or annoys me may or may not offend or annoy you or others.

Target got my back up with their polite and specifically worded request, and so I see no reason for myself to not give them what they (likely unwittingly) asked for: My absence.

For me the tipping point with Target came on November 8, 2000 when I woke up to NPR crowing that department store heir Mark Dayton had bought himself a Senate seat (they didn't word it exactly that way).

The nearest Target to me is about 2 miles away in an extremely anti-self-defense mall. The mall "code of conduct" says no guns or knives or anything that can be used as a weapon anywhere on mall property, including the parking lots. I keep my 3500 pound "can be used as a weapon" away from their parking lots. And my money away from their stores.

This one is only very weakly tied to the OC movement. It is mostly motivated by Bloomberg money via his paid lobbyists working for his astroturf advocacy groups. Minnesota, where Target is headquartered has gotten almost as much of their attention as Colorado. It's been a running battle at the legislature and around the state for a few years now.

The anti-gunners' game got cranked up a notch in the last year with the addition of a couple of paid political operators from out of state, rather than the whole thing being run by local amateurs. Even so, Target is already backing down a bit, telling the local bird cage liner that this is not a prohibition, but just a request. They are not going to put up the signs that would be required under State Law. In general I'm with Tam, though, in being willing to comply with such requests.

How interesting and so soon after the TX Open Carry group traipsing through a Target Store in TX while carrying M4grs, AK derivative's and Mall Ninja 12 GA PSG w/extended mag tubes and side mounted shell carriers. Oh & lets not forget the high cap magazines stuffed into the rifles. All of this publicly posted in a FB page. Was doing all of that illegal? Nope. Was it even remotely sensible or do anything other than raise the hackles of people? Nope. Now your looking at a boilerplate document from Target, probably aimed at forestalling litigations. Crap. I'm not an open carry proponent but Target just lost my business.

I've never really understood Target-- why would I pay more in order to shop with a smug sense of self-worth and less selection?

From friends I've asked, and the occasional article by left wing journalists on the whole Walmart-Target divide, what people don't like is that Walmart has "fat" and "unclean" people. (Seriously, the only concrete answers I've ever heard revolve around the "other people" who shop there) From what I can tell, those are mostly code words for poor people and/or minorities.

Tam, I understand if Target is around the corner, and Walmart not, but at least in the suburban communities where I've lived, where there is one, there is the other.

Just where in the Target organizational chart is the person responsible for firing customers? I am one with the pants thing. If I'm outside my unit and wearing pants, well, you know..when the Salvation Army klingelers come back, maybe we can talk. Maybe. Call me. Right.

Target has lawyers, and those lawyers can read the statute books; if Target wanted TRULY to prohibit carry on their premises they could easily post the correct signs, with the proper wording. In Texas, they could post a correct Penal Code Section 30.06 sign and ban concealed carry, and any old sign in compliance with PC Section 30.05 would legally prohibit open carry of a rifle.

Target doesnt want to do the sign thing because they are trying to appease the Bloomies and at the same time not make Gun People mad. Wishy washy statements of "request" are meaningless and un-enforceable and I believe that they are intentionally so.

Until they post a legal sign, I will view Target management merely as cowardly "take-no-side" fence sitters.

I have heard many people say that if they do not have the "force of law" sign up then the stores I trying to play both sides of the fence.I am tired of thinking that way. Every store that politely asks people not to carry firearms in a non-legal fashion is giving the gun banners a victory. After all they only need to make firearms not common and/or get enough people to think a firearm separated from a badge is not only scary but a trigger event.

How about they make a statement that says, "we politely ask our customers not to bring their opinions in our stores even in communities where freely speaking is allowed."I mean, that is not "legally" enforceable, so I guess they are not truly against free speech.

Sport Pilot and Greg Tag hit the nails on their heads: This was CYA to remove the political issue from their retail operations.

Here in TX it matters not what any business "desires" regarding concealed carry. Unless there is a 30.06 sign correctly posted, concealed handguns and openly carried long guns are welcome by law.

That anti-gunners don't understand that is their problem, not mine.

As to Target itself: I usually can't find a reason to go into the one near my home. They have nothing, absolutely nothing, that is not available at better prices or more conveniently elsewhere. Usually I forget it exists, unless I am going through their parking lot after hitting Five Guys Burgers for a few thousand calories. So they have that going for them, I guess.

"Here in TX it matters not what any business "desires" regarding concealed carry. Unless there is a 30.06 sign correctly posted, concealed handguns and openly carried long guns are welcome by law. "

I realize you live in a gun-unfriendly state (here in Indiana a business could tape the entire criminal code in the window, but unless they specifically come and ask you personally to leave, it doesn't mean dick) but that doesn't mean you need to give your money to people who have explicitly stated that they don't want you bringing a firearm in their store.

You can put as much "Oh, they only meant those OTHER gun owners" lipstick on that pig as you want, and I personally don't care where you shop, but don't lie to yourself. It's unbecoming.

I have yet to see that Target (or any other retailer) is guaranteeing my personal safety or for anyone else in their stores or their parking lots. Therefore, I recommend that everyone make sure that they carry a weapon to promote their own safety and for their families wherever it is legal. Just don't tell Target (or any other retailer), as they would not understand the concept.

As to the open carry advocates, may I suggest that you advocate that your states pass legislation that no one may discriminate against you for asserting your Second Amendment rights?

The Greensborough, North Carolina Woolworth's lunch counter refused to serve blacks, leading to sit-ins and a boycott in 1960. The actions of Target management makes as much sense as Woolworth's did over half a century ago. Target (and other retailers) may well suffer the same fate as Woolworth's.

I dont give a hoot about Target or Dayton-Hudson, but the crack about "gun-unfriendly" stung a bit, and I hardly see how your statement could be true.

I rise to the defense of my home- fair Texas.

In Texas CHL fees are cheap,( I will grant you not as cheap as Indiana, but the program pays only for itself and is revenue neutral) and if you are a vet or senior they are almost free; CHL class is 4-6 hours of lecture, a simple written test and a firing proficiency test that merely assesses whether you are a threat to innocent parties downrange- it is easily passed by almost anyone.

Long guns, suppressors and other Class III are of no concern to the state; pistols may be carried openly or concealed while hunting or fishing or engaged in agriculture work. Unlike Indiana, no permit is required to carry a loaded pistol or long gun in a vehicle.

We can carry in state parks, at the Alamo and city hall, unlike in Indiana, Texans can carry at the offices of the water district, and the electric company; we can also carry at the flood control district and the county clerk's office.

We don't have open carry of handguns, but that is a prohibition created by a backlash to Reconstruction - something you Hoosiers did not endure.

We are working on the handgun OC thing, which is the genesis of the Target kerfluffle. I hope constituional carry has not been set back

As for business prohibition of CHL carry, in Texas a business cannot prohibit CHL carry unless they post the long winded PC 30.06 sign in two languages.

When the Legislature passed CHL, they protected the rights of property owners to prohibit carry on their premises; on the other hand, the sign is purposely wordy enough that most would -be prohibitors get it wrong, or they get the letter size, or color or the Spanish phrasing wrong and if it is not IDENTICAL to the statutory language, it is invalid.A "gun-buster" or "no guns allowed" sign is simply wasted effort;such have no legal force.

Few stores want to go to the effort of properly posting a legally compliant 2'x3' properly worded sign and those who do so find sales are affected, so the signs come down pretty quickly.

Anyway, as I have demonstrated, would not in any way call Texas "gun unfriendly"; to do so is merely overblown hyperbole. I love visiting Indiana and knowing that I can carry at Spring Mill State Park and the Lawrence County Tax office- ya'll are actually pretty much like Texas - you havent kowtowed to the Leftist elites - pehaps that is why I enjoy my visits to Hoosierland.

I believe the statement was made to get the Bloomie Mommies to go away.

The part that has not been said is that in TX Target sells liquor. My understanding is that if the allow unlicensed carry by patrons their liquor license is at risk from TABC. This is partly the reason why restaurants all post the alternate unlicensed possession sign in TX. If true this could also be about looking like they did something about it to bureaucrats. If the local PTA mom's couldn't but their wine while shopping for their wares what would they ever do.